Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)
for many, many years both of the tax consistent with spending. and nobody ever put the debt ceiling or the u.s. willingness to pay its obligations on the table in the way it was placed in the summer of 2011, and the way here it is now being placed on the table again. it's a big mistake and 2011 to create this degree of uncertainty and fear in the u.s. and around the world and the big mistake to do it again today. >> why would any good thinking patriotic american want to use the debt ceiling as a vehicle to reduce spending rather than the other legislative opportunities it would have? what would the reason be? certain not to embarrass the united states of america. >> i have no idea, mr. rangel, but i can tell you that -- >> well, if you don't have any, then maybe it is the objectives of this president at whatever cost, some leaders our so-called leaders have said, that they want to stop this president and the were unsuccessful in that measure. so maybe, maybe they decided to change tactics and maybe this discussion is a necessary and we find some of the way to a handle on the deficit
will not, not now, not ever support raising the gas tax. [ applause ] the answer to our infrastructure problems is not to tax our people more. it is so spend their money smarter. why would we raise the gas tax to improve infrastructure when all of the gas tax dollars we currently collect don't go to improving our infrastructure now. millions of dollars each year in our gas tax revenue are being diverted away from our bridges and our highways. let's change that. and then let's invest more of the money we already have into this vital area. every year you hear me talk about the money tree that falls during session whereby new dollars appear above and beyond what was available whin we balanced our budget in december and january. let's prioritize that money differently this year. we've's released an executive budget that is balanced. funds the core function of government. strengthens underfunded needs like mental health and law enforcement and identifies money for road and bridge improvements. let's follow that blueprint. we can make our state safer and our business climate can be more dyna
about the gas tax. i'm sure you have all thought about it a lot. plenty of studies have shown consumer willingness to buy fuel-efficient cars is tied to lower prices and gas or i should say higher prices and gas. congress obviously is in no mood to raise the gas tax right now, so how do we deal with that to make consumers perhaps more willing to look at fuel-efficient models? >> an excellent question. who wants to take that? >> i will be brave. i think when i think about how do we get consumers -- it's nice to see you. we have talked on the phone a lot before. when. when we look at getting these consumers, for me it's about educating them on the total cost of ownership and what that means for them over the course of the life of of the vehicle, whether they are in a lease situation or they have purchased a door there is a 10% that -- it's understanding the total, and i also think -- one of my girlfriends lives in new jersey. they. they don't have to pump their own gas. they do it for you there. she moved and she was horrified. you have to put a value on having an electric car you can pl
. >> what about a carbon tax? >> well, it works out to be similar. i think, what is it? for every $10, it's about 10 cents a gallon, 8 cents a gallon for gasoline. so it's another tax. i just think we have to be very careful because it affects consumers so broadly, and there are unintended consequences. at the same time these advanced technology vehicles, as tom brought up, hybrids are going to have to compete with better and better conventional vehicles, and batter in electric cars, will have to compete with better and better hybrids. it becomes very difficult. it's helpful when the our market signals saying this is what society values. society values reducing carbon, therefore, therefore the there's a path, therefore there is an incentive or something like that. but very difficult to actually implement in a way that has become fair and balanced. >> i know that auto countries have been working to show that there's a very direct correlation between high gasoline prices and the selling of more fuel-efficient cars, hybrids, electric cars. and that's political "inconvenient truth" in the hig
and further away made their living standards are slashed and force us to repeat or taxes used to build governments on the other side of the continent. we're for starting duties at some demonstrations of athens, madrid and rome. restarting casein in berlin, helsinki and the hague and of course were saying this frustration with the e.u. vary dramatically here in the united kingdom. europe's leaders have a duty to hear these concerns. indeed we have a duty to act on them and not just to fix the problems in the euro zone, but if in any emergency should plan for the amount as well as dealing with the present crisis center in the midst of present challenges we should plan for the future and what the world will look like when difficulties in the euro zone have been overcome. the biggest danger to the european union comes not from those who advocate change, but those who denounce new thinking is heresy. in its long history, europe has experienced heretics that turned out to have point. my point is this. for the same will not secure long-term future for the euro zone. more of the sample not fit
from taking this legislative tax out of this five-page document into a detailed legislative proposal. they're. there are going to be a number of -- this bill could be several hundred pages long and we are talking about a very sweeping change not just in the legal immigration system but as well as how you deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants. how they do that in the hurdles that remain will be interesting to see how much they detail that. >> you point out in one of your stories at the vigorous debate on this since -- >> and we remember what happened then. this blew up in the senate after big push by the bush administration and a bipartisan coalition trying to get this through with opposition from both sides and of course creating amnesty but we have seen some of those going through muted in the initial days and we will see what happens when the legislative process continues. >> the gang of eight for four republicans and four democrats have put together work of an immigration bill and immigration principles. how do we find out that the gang exists? >> one of our reporters was th
, by restoring clinton-era tax rates for the top 1% of income earners. that's what we've done so far. i think it probably is safe to say that the tax rate discussion is probably done, but we have not even begun to discuss tax loopholes. why should millionaires get more tax benefit against their charitable contributions than middle-class families do? why should a billionaire who builds a wing on a museum and puts his name on it get more tax bang for his charitable buck than the middle-class family who gives to their local church? is protecting that benefit for high-end charitable donors more important than addressing our deficit? how about tax subsidies to the most profitable companies in the world, the big oil behemoths? the american taxpayer is asked to provide money to big and often foreign oil companies. is keeping big oil lobbyists happy with subsidies from the american people more important than addressing our deficit? should companies and wealthy individuals be allowed to hide their money from the tax man in offshore accounts while working families pay their taxes fair and square? is pr
their tax and? >> the policy of both our presidency at the g8 and more generally in the work we did in poor countries to make sure that we're far more transparency from global corporations, that they pay their fair share of tax, and that they do so to the most appropriate tax regimes in which they work. >> given recent events what additional help is he proposing for the people of yemen? >> trying to the friends of yemen meeting is looming. we are supporting the social fund development that gives urgent food and welfare need. we are encouraging the government of yemen to set up an executive bureau for national dialogue, and we are also ensuring that pledged funds can find a proper method of being dispersed so they can go to the projects so desperately needed. >> order. questions to the prime minister. >> number one, mr. speaker. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, this morning i had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, and in addition to my duties in the cells i shall have further such meetings later today. >> thank you, mr. speaker. is it right that a mother and my contingen
start-up companies eligible for the existing research and development or r&d tax credit. and today i'm proud to reintroduce that legislation as the start-up innovation credit act of 2013 with our original cosponsors, as well as senators blunt, stabenow and moran. this broad bipartisan support i think suggests that this is a bill whose time has come. although we represent among the cosponsors very different parts of our country and very different backgrounds, all of us know that to strengthen our economy, we have to support innovation and entrepreneurship. each of us is committed to fostering the kind of environment that supports the private sector and which turns ideas into innovations, innovations into products, products into companies that help create good jobs. under current policy, one way we do that federally is by supporting research and development through the existing r&d tax credit. companies that invest in r&d generate new products which sparks new industries with spillover benefits for all kinds of sectors. that's why there's long been strong bipartisan support for the exi
an outdated and anticompetitive tax code, and to streamline government bureaucracies that are literally suffering job creation. they have done their jobs while senate democrats have tried to keep their priorities secret. now, we know senate democrats don't like the house budgets, and we know they don't even support the president's budgets, at least not with their votes. what we haven't known for nearly four years is what they're for, because they have refused to put their plans for the country down on paper and actually vote for them. now it's my hope that the democratic sudden interest in passing a budget isn't just another attempt to actually raise taxes. as i've said repeatedly, we're done with the revenue issue. the president has already said that the so-called rich are now paying their -- quote -- "fair share" -- end quote, and of course middle-class families are already on the hook for new taxes as a result of obamacare. so the question is who would be in the firing line this time? and at what cost? look, struggling families shouldn't have to pick up the tab again for washington'
austerity or the taxes are used to bail out governments on the other side of the continent. we are starting to see this in the demonstrations on the streets of athens, magid and world. we're starting to see it in the parliaments of berlin, helsinki and the hague. and yes, of course, we are seeing this frustration with the eu very dramatically here in the united kingdom. europe's leaders have a duty to hear these concerns. indeed, we have a duty to act on them. and not just to fix the problems in the eurozone. for just as in any emergency you should plan for the aftermath as well as dealing with the present crisis, so, too, in the midst of the present challenges we should plan for the future, and what the world will look like when the difficulties and the eurozone have been overcome. now, the biggest danger to the european union comes not from those who advocate change, but from those who denounce new thinking as heresy. in its long history europe has experience of heretics who turned out to have a point. and my point is this. more the same on the secure a long-term future for the eurozone.
reform the entitlement programs, put tax reform in place, go through regular order in the finance committee as the chairman and others called for, to ensure we can get this under control. it's a commonsense proposal. we did it two years ago. most democrats and most republicans here on the floor supported it in the past. democrats in the house have also supported it, about 95 of them. it's a dollar-for-dollar reduction over ten years as we raise the debt limit. for folks who are wondering today -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. portman: thank you, madam chair. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: madam president, january 23, i think it was a wednesday, something marvelous happened. what was that? the house, on a strong bipartisan basis, passed a bill which would raise the debt limit, extend the debt limit to may 18. bipartisan. speaker boehner is to be commended. this town is criticized for its lack of working together, it's too partisan. speaker boehner found a solution to help us relieve the pressure
in louisiana including the tax reform he's just launched in the past few weeks, what he's doing is trying to think about how at this moment at a time when globalization's putting enormous pressures on working class voters, at a time when the economy is going through a very complicated, difficult moment when it's not clear how to get back to growth, he's thinking creatively about how to use the strength of his state to build on its weaknesseses. and i think at the national level that's what conservatives have to do. to some extempt, it's being done. i would say the policy agenda that has to come at the end of that conversation is not fully worked out by any means, but the questions are being asked. i think the direction of thinking has been helpful even in the wake of the election. if you listen to what people like marco rubio or paul ryan have been saying, it's different from what they themselves were saying six months ago, a year ago. i think the focus is turning to the right place. that doesn't mean that he'll persuade the public, but it certainly helps to ask the right question if you'
emissions by heavily taxing or tapping the use of carbon based fuels is that a fair estimation? that issue because of what it could do to oil is what really really kind of had been shaking in their boots. >> at think it got their attention. it was a combination of power was a very existential threat. the reason we were talking before. they had overcome the previous systematic threat to oil production in the world which were spills and environmental damage and the seepage of oil into water and it supplies and air pollution. all of that have been more or less brought into a sustainable compact of regulator and regulated. they have themselves adapted. they accepted the validity of the environmental goals read comes to spills and air pollution and so forth. they impose costs on themselves in order to build a sustainable compact. just a moment when they have cruising speed of all the other in burma to issues that arose in the first year for decades of oil, now comes this other existential more abstract global challenge to the primacy of fossil fuels and a system. i think that was one factor. pe
words. a decision by government to limit green house gas emissions by heavily taxing or tapping the use of carbon based fuels. is that a fair estimation? that issue, because of what it could do to oil -- is what really kind of had them shaking in their boots. >> guest: it was a combination how a rare -- they had overcome the previous systemic threats to oil production in the world, which were spills and environmental damage and the seepage of oil into water and drinking supplies and air pollution, all of that had been more or less brought into a sustainable compact of regulator and regulated, and they had been themselves adopted -- they accepted the validity of these environmental goals when it comes to spills and air pollution and so target. that they had imposed costs on. thes in order to build the sustainable compacts so just at the moment when they have cruising speed on the other environmental issues that arose in the first three or four decades of the order world, now comes this an distract globalham challenge to the prime si of fossil fuels in our system. i think that was one fac
and encouraging engineering are beginning to have an effect. >> this government has just introduced two new tax base which will cause people who own the oh, no, between 25 and 35,000 pounds per family. why is he choosing to put a block on the aspirations of young people who want to build their own home? >> we are encouraging people to build a own home and buy their own homes, not least by the reform of the planning system that has seen the planning guidance come from 1000 pages to 50 pages. that's why we are also encouraging the right to buy. and if honorable members opposite want to help, they might want to talk to the labour of 40s that are continually knocking people from buying the council or having association homes. >> thank you, mr. speaker. will my right honorable friend wish to congratulate the company in my constituency, but taking advantage of the capital of laos is announced and the autumn statement of purchase to 1.3 million pounds, that will create six new jobs under -- i certain to my honorable friend in welcoming that investment it is experience in campaign history logic did hav
taxes. that we shouldn't do that. you know what obama said three days after? he said eric, i want, you must come i trump you on that. a week later he said i want the folks who got us into this mess to do a whole lot less talking and a lot more listening. you can talk a little, but he wants you to stand beside mine so we cleaned this up for you. unbelievable, condescending notion of unifying the country, bringing us together. instead kansas city mantra of attack and vilify the other side. it was just like his 2008 campaign for president was hoping change, while the speeches with no substance whatsoever. the only substance as he was going to unify us come to be that post-partisan president in almost immediately it was conservatives are hostage takers. they are the enemy. they care only about millionaires and billionaires are not children's autism and down syndrome. but with this approach? why did obama and his administration come in wanting to vilify the other side the content featured? he was bringing to the administration that philosophy of a community organizer. for years obama has sa
that a little bit more? there was a concern by the executives. they want to be able to get the salaries tax-deferred. eventually there is a little code put into the tax called the 401k and these high and executives get the right to put their money aside on tax-deferred basis. no one thinks anything of this except for one man who and he sees that why can this be all of us and he gets the administration to agree with his viewpoint on this in the early 1980's. the next part which almost nobody foresaw is the idea that we demand that we don't have to give people pensions, dewey? the 401k could substitute and this is where the corporate cost cutters began and they say even if you are going to match at 3% or 6% is a lot cheaper than funding the pension. besides a lot of people won't find out any way is so don't worry about that but surely over a period of many years, the numbers drift out to where we are today. >> host: this is all happening when the stock market was just waging in the 80s and 90s and people thought there were going to get 25% returns a year. >> guest: there is the opposition exc
things with economic reform but tax reform, immigration reform. i don't have a crystal ball but i think that there is little doubt that the president would be willing to compromise if the other party is willing to meet him part of the way. but the other party's job is to see how much it can get for its side and given the issues that we have been through such as the fiscal cliff, the fact is there's no way out of the issues without compromise but i do think that we will see compromise on something like immigration reform because demographics is destiny and the republicans as well as the democrats recognize that they have to share some support for the immigration reform if they are not going to in the case of the republicans lose the span of the population permanently. to the republican party. so, the president has already i believe shown a willingness to compromise, and all of the data shows that the republicans are the party that has moved to the right and the left although both parties are extreme, so i feel that we are going to see the president because he won the election to be tough
finance minister started an initiative on this that this year g8 will look at tax evasion and tax fraud. i think it's enormously important issue, and i think the regulation on the shadow banking system, um, also needs to play a very important role for the russia meeting for the g20. we have quite a lot of regulation for our banks, basel iii comes to mind here. here, actually, we have to be vigilant that the lending capacity that is to boost, after all, economic growth doesn't get too contained, too limited, and i can only hope and join our partners in the united states to introdiscuss deuce this -- introduce this as well, otherwise a new imbalance here. through better regulation of banks, the capital that they need to the capital reserves that they need to have, we also see moral hazard in the sense that people increasingly seem to fly into the shadows of shadow banking. we were at one in saying when we agreed this at the g20 and the thought that every financial instrument, um, every financial be product, every financial market needs to be placed in regulation. we are very far from that. i
-paying jobs in these industries will be paying the taxes to some other country, will be simply an economy and some of the country. you want to know what america is special? one of the reasons why it special is because for over 200 years we have been a collection of the world's best and brightest to a magnet that attracts people here and now have an immigration system in the 21st century that is making a very difficult to achieve. that's what this effort is to the other concern i heard is what about folks that are in this country now? this is a legitimate concern when people raise it, i don't get upset about that. that is a very legitimate concern. about the kids are raised here and go into these intricate, will they be hurt if you have seen the need, they need far exceeds what we are producing. so that's not an immediate concern but here's the other. that is the startling figure that was used earlier. that for every 100, 100 foreign-born s.t.e.m. workers we're creating 260 some odd jobs. it's indisputable that these jobs create jobs for people right down the line in this process. if you'r
in north dakota former state tax commissioner and state attorney general heidi heitkamp was elected in november. and in maine, former governor angus king, was elected to the u.s. senate as an independent. he replaces republican olympia snowe who retired. >> on thursday, president obama's pic to be defense secretary chuck hagel will testify at a senate confirmation hearing. we will have live coverage from the senate armed services committee at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span and c-span radio. >> the 2005 real id act establishes standards for drivers licenses and other documents based on recommendations from the 9/11 commission. 13 states are fully compliant with a lot today. next, a conversation on state id standards posted by the heritage foundation. this is 50 minutes. >> good morning, welcome to the heritage foundation. we, of course, welcome those who join us on our website. those that will be joining us on c-span as well. i would ask everyone in house if you will check to make sure cell phones have been turned off as we prepare to begin. always helpful. i am pleased tod
, but does it help anybody? cuts the amount of taxes that gates sends to the federal government to control the meat inspectors and all the wonderful things the government does for us, and so you have to, i think, take cognizance of why the country is great. it's because of the wealth. you can't defeat poverty if you don't create wealth. .. santorum served 14 -- 16 years in congress. did he ever once hisser anything about banning contraceptives? yet, somehow that message was -- it took advantage of all the low-information women voters who just follow joy behar and have no idea that rick santorum and mother teresa believes that contraception is against the catholic teaching. i'm told only 20% of the catholics respect that teaching, but for those who do, it used to be in my time you respected people's religious beliefs you didn't ridicule them or demonize them. i think the fact the democrats were successful -- getting back to negativity -- where was the war on women. they tried to convince that somehow santorum was going to do this and the republicans are against contraception. i think i even
, not to mention tax breaks that encourage companies that -- that allow companies to deduct the cost of moving their plant overseas against their federal tax, those are the kinds of things that average americans are waiting for the house of representatives to act, legislation that will make a real difference in their lives right now. i said i'm fine with the no budget, no pay act. we should pass a budget. we should move forward on that. we need to raise the debt ceiling and stop playing politics with this, but let the house of representatives get moving on the issues that affect everyday americans. that's all about jobs, that's all about this economic recovery. madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. brown: madam president? the presiding officer: yes, the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. for the senate, the letter of resignation of senator john f. kerry of massachusetts, effective friday, february 1, at 4:00 p.m. without o
to get salaries tax deferred, you know, high earners we're talking here. they go, and eventually, there's a little code put into the tax law in the late 1970s called the 401(k), and these high end executives have the right to put money aside on a tax deferred basis. no one thinks anything of this except for one man, an attorney, and he said why should it just be high end executives? you have to see all of us. they get the administration to agree with his view point on this, and this takes place by the time of the early 1980s, and then the next part, which almost nobody foresaw is the idea that, wait a minute, we don't have to give people pensions, do we? these 401(k)s are really could substitute for a pension, and this is where the corporate cost cutters creep in, and hey, even if you match at 6%, it's cheaper than funding a pension, and, besides, a lot of people won't sign up anyway, don't worry about the 6%. slowly, but surely, over a period of many years, the numbers drift down to where we are today. >> host: and, of course, this was happening while the stock market was just raging t
taxes and you will have to pay a fine. and what you will get is basically the equivalent of a nonresident visa that allows you to work here. you do not qualify for federal financial benefits, so you are not a strain. i've heard that concern raised, this is going to place a strain on our social services. as a nonimmigrant visa holder you do not qualify -- under existing law now you do not qualify for federal benefits. what you get is a work perm. the ability to be here legally. we know where you are, we know where you live. you pay taxes. you've paid a fine. this is not amnesty and you have a nonimmigrant visa. there is nothing you can do with that visa is stay here and work. you can travel to visit relatives. you can't turn that into citizenship. they will have to remain in that probationary phase for a significant period of time, not an unreasonable period of time but a significant period of time. after that period of time elapsed and if they have complied with all the requirements of that probearingsary period and if -- probation ary period and if it is certified the en
by that measure in the 1990s in russia. one clue is the subsidies that you could get for the import of tax-free tobacco and alcohol to benefit good causes such as the red cross. this was profitable and, therefore, of interest. it's even a science fiction story. because what we're dealing here really when you come right down to it is the meeting of two alien civilizations after 70 years of the soviet period. the oil industry in particular grew up in almost complete isolation from the west, and this is virtually a unique case. we have other places where oil industries have grown up, where oil industries are run by national oil companies, but in almost every case -- in fact in every case -- these industries were first founded by foreigners and then were taken over. not so in the case of russia where from the 1920s on at any rate or for all practical purposes the oil industry was home grown and developed its own culture, its own civilization even as the soviet union did with its own language and its own culture. i sometimes like to tell my classes that the story of russia in the 20th century i
with, you know, the tax credits deductions people get from housing and then in the early 70's we start on the path of the community reinvestment act, which forced banks to go into the low-income high risks of prime lending business and banks had no business being in that business with the people's money. the banks shouldn't be in the high-risk lending business. that got the minimum going, but the big event actually happened in september of 1999. remember, bill clinton who was president of the time made it really mandatory, although it had actually gone back up for two years but he said okay, the great american fannie mae, the government sponsored enterprises, you are going to have at least half of your loans and affordable housing lending. and that was a really dramatic because of the size of freddie and danny and a number of economists actually an article in "the new york times" of all police identified the risk involved in this issue and they said less than, fri and fannie are so big that there is no way that they can meet this goal without radically reducing the lending standards in
to college and don't yet have to pay taxes. when i went to school i was primarily concerned with getting good grades richmond spewing rustling political science positions back at my professors. as a, i didn't have time to get wrapped up and fighting for a cause. a republican meeting in the end of my freshman year i was elected a vice president. there were three people in attendance and i cast the deciding vote. during my senior year of college, 9/11 occurred. that event changed my view of the world that this for many of us ensure. it also reaffirmed much of what i had already believe in that pushed me further to the right. it wasn't just the event itself that caused the reaction of the vessel anti-americanism on the campuses afterwards. as you would expect there was outraged for what the audience. except the outrage wasn't directed at the fanatics and he said restricted at the united states. restricted at us for supporting our country and a government that is at times forced to adopt costs and even conflicting policies in a complicated world. of all schools as much of the same. if you happen
as a concern among executives at kodak they want to get salaries tax-deferred, high earners. somebody goes to congress so there is the code put and call the 401k and the high end executives could put money aside tax-deferred basis. nobody thinks anything about this except for one man who is an attorney and he said why should it just be high and executives? he gets the reagan administration to agree and it takes place in the early 1980's. the next part that almost nobody foresaw is the idea we don't have to give people pensions, the for a 1k is a good substitute and this is where the corporate cost cutters start to creep in and say even if you match it is a lot cheaper than finding a pension and a lot of people will sign up anyway. and slowly but surely over a period of many years the numbers are where we are today. >> this happened when the stock market was raging and people thought they would get 20 or 25% returns. >> there may have been more opposition except the stock market doubles again and again and again between 1982 and 2000 or 2007 depending on how you count. people think this is
during the years of planning. when famine came. the people have given us seven years of extra taxes. but i saw the wisdom adjusted, pay down our guests and stories receipts against the leaner times that will surely follow. in the midst of the great depression, franklin roosevelt said there's a mysterious cycle in human events. to some generations much is given. of others, much is expected. this generation has a rendezvous with destiny. we write in california have a rendezvous with destiny. around spc data and skepticism about about her future of america. but we have accomplished together all the people in assuming that you'll accomplish coming up. indeed the whole history of california belies such pessimism. i wonder how california began. in 1769 under king charles the third, orders were issued to dekalb ace, occupy important sites, san diego monterey for the crown of spain. his brave men made their way slowly north along an unchartered pass. eventually they reached moderate, could recognize that they had identified him as supplies failing, they marched san diego. for us to eat the
tax dollars, billions of them. and now all of a sudden some are suggesting we should change the rules when we are hit by the first major disaster to hit the new york city region in a very long time. that's not fair. that's not right. and we have argued against it, and i hope my colleagues will defeat the lee amendment. and i also say to my colleagues that this is not just dollars and cents. these are people who care, are waiting, homeowners waiting to rebuild their homes. they haven't moved back in. small business owners who are hanging on by a thread after building a business for 25 years. we know when the hand of god strikes, it's overwhelming for them. take rita from emerald magic lawn care. her company helps local families, schools and businesses with lawn care in the spring and summer and around the holidays they help with decorations and lights. but emerald magic's business was interrupted for many weeks. the client base dried up. rita's business will be in huge trouble. it may not survive if she doesn't get a lifeline and get one now. so this is very important. week after week,
. but of course households in the end pay the taxes that support government expenditures. they pay premiums through their employers for health coverage. day four wage increases that could be much higher than health costs were they growing as fast so they really capture the whole $2 trillion in the end. we are not talking about -- i hear a lot of talk about if there is really health reform and people fighting for over a dwindling and shrinking tide. i would posit that only in health care with a growth from $2.9 trillion in 2013, to $25.1 trillion in 2003 would be referred to as a shrinking tide. it would be flowing if nothing was done. so, we are talking now, to give you some sense of how -- the magnitude of this -- we are talking about health spending under current policy, totaling $42 trillion over the next 10 years. so if you save $2 trillion ,-com,-com ma you would be reducing health spending to only $40 trillion over the next 10 years. you would be cutting the growth in health spending from an estimated 90% under current policy to only 75% over the next 10 years. so we have to keep that
this. restart. marshall friday. many of you nestle listing. so i'm very, very proud that tax papers are here, as i said, where they belong. now to return to his question, actually, initially i had a very negative approach. it did not start out very well. when jack retired he came back. he brought home with them about 20 boxes of the biggest mess you ever saw. jack was not just organized. he was opposed to this organization. anyway, i started out to help him sort the papers. and so i have bought all these file boxes. about folders and everything. the pick of the paper and sick and the way you think this one goes? the atlanta constitution or the marvin griffin administration. he was sick and give me that and start reading it. he read every piece of paper. he could not part with a single one. after today's idea of. okay. it's all yours. the second reason i had a negative impression was that they brought silver fish into the house. [laughter] so after he died in that a side that, you know, his memoir needed to be completed. it was a wonderful read. an important book. i knew that meant a
running the country. policymakers who believe in structural reforms, privatization, tax reforms, budget cuts, labor mobility, and they need to be competitive both internally and externally. if you don't have, if you don't have plans like that you will not get them back to growth anytime soon. so it's very, very important that you do that. seven, the point is the private sector. and i think this is a problem. because at the beginning there was no interest in the case of greece and some of these other countries involved in the private sector. and, in fact, it was a when things got so bad that greece called upon the private sector with the european union. the european central bank and the international monetary fund, to really get the private sector involved. and there you had a big haircut that could've been dealt with earlier. it would have been as bad and now they just have to do another debt buyback problem, operation, which is still a problem. so i think the idea getting the private sector involved early on, and we show this both in latin america and asia, the asian financial crisis.
majority support on a cloture vote: the dream act, bring jobs home act, small business jobs and tax relief act, paying fair share act of 2012, repeal big oil tax subsidies act, teachers and first responders back-to-work act, american jobs act of 2011, public safety employer-employee cooperation act, paycheck fairness act, creating american jobs and ending offshoring act. now, again -- again, it's not that the bill was filibustered. the right to even debate these bills and vote on them was filibustered. one thing, he go on the bill and they filibuster. no, we couldn't even debate it. even though a majority of senators voted for cloture. not 60 but a majority. so the majority thwarted from even bringing these up and debating them and even letting people offer amendments. now, it used to come that if a senator opposed a bill, he or she would engage in a spirited debate, try to change people's minds, attempt to persuade the public, offer amendments, vote "no," and then try to hold members who voted "yes" accountable at the ballot box. isn't that what it's about? in contrast, today, to quote fo
read the comment attributed to him was we shall tax and spend. whether true or not, of course, he denied it. it stuck with him for the rest of his life and became a rallying cry for those who hated roosevelt and the new deal. as if that wasn't enough, in september of 1939 when war broke out in europe, he found himself back at the mayo clinic. the doctors ruled out a recurrence of cancer, but they could not figure out why he was unable to absorb nutrients. so they gave him a blood transfusion and injections of liver extracts. a combination that was administered to him often for the rest of his life. i'm times at work and sometimes it didn't. for the rest of his life, he was unable to gain weight. his digestive system -- it was a mass. sometimes he is was on the verge of starvation for me before he moved into the white house, he had his little house in georgetown -- a little rented house with his daughter, diana. he was still recovering. the president had some challenging issues on his mind. the president knew that hitler would turn to the west. he threatened to invade the british i
subsidies started with tax credits and then in the early '70s to start on a path with the community reinvestment act the force banks to get from the lending business and they have no business to be in that business. but the big event happened september 1989 where bill clinton who was president made it mandatory and said freddie mac and fannie mae at least half loans have to be in affordable lending. that was the dramatic announcement because of the size of fannie and freddie and they identified the risk involved in it and said fitted for a year so big that they cannot meet the goal without radically reducing menders -- lending standards and if they achieve that goal they will take so much risk that they could get into financial trouble and they are so vague they can take up the whole financial system. nine years later date of $5 trillion in had $2 trillion of some prime even before they failed they were leveraged 1,000 / one. like a net worth of $10,000 and can borrow to million. you can only do that if the government guarantees your debt. this is under estimated. the dominant playe
in rome, the mills in south georgia, state payroll padding, embezzlement of tax funds, confects for private work, nepotism from purchasing schemes such as the state board of leaks with no water. [laughter] on i could go on. many of these expos ase took place during the griffin administration which president carter can attest notoriously corrupt. they had never stolen so much. but ronald griffin was kind of day for giving sort of croak. quite a few years later she and jack and other reporters were drinking and marvin griffin said to jack you know how use to think every time i would see him walking into a press conference was a notebook, and jack said what? he said i used to think with that beady eye son of a bitch has on me today. [laughter] she used to pursue the story for the "l.a. times," and he was always -- i think we have to watch our time here so i just going to end by saying how happy i am that this book is published because she had such a wonderful career in washington it tended to overshadow this earlier phase of his career in the south, and this book although it ends h
-rights bill, tax bill, at least started all of them on the road to passage. january 8th is also the date that lyndon johnson's first state of the union speech, the speech in which he makes the presidency is unknown, with his announcement that america is going to have a war on poverty. if we don't know them and we don't -- to not well enough no history are wonderful. too many americans live on the outskirts of hope and that is -- that is his quote. that is who we have to help. the more detail you learn about how johnson did it, what he did with congress, what he did to congress, the more amazing accomplishment seems. the civil-rights bill is dead, he sees in an instant only one letter can move us forward, a parliamentary maneuver and i wrote in the book there was only one leader of lyndon johnson was going to grab. there was only one letter he was going to push, he was going to put all his weight behind it. all of a sudden the new york times write something changed on capitol hill yesterday and the civil-rights bill starts to move. during this brief transition period, what i call the pass
of times in these urban areas, but also punjab and islamabad. you know, the number of tax increases two to three times. but the amount of casualties goes 20 to 25 times within a short period of time. pakistani military come the states they these attacks are likely to come again in the future should they take on certain other operations like north waziristan and haqqani network. this is a profound concern was to be repeatedly right after admiral mullen statements in 2011 about the pakistani government not doing much about the haqqani network. the explanation that can be taken with a grain of salt, but nevertheless should be padded out. if they describe the hornets last, they would be in alliances chapati networks and bring the same level of violent the pakistanis experienced in 2007 at 2009, which crashed pakistani public and military and returned again and that was something in it. tennessee great degree of calibration as to what you have to absorb or bair that motivates the limited strategy to utilize. another question comes up with selectivity that they distinguished a taliban verse t
before you pay any increase taxes. it doesn't make any sense. when you go into medicare, your pain to set up premiums and two sets of metadata coverage. two sets of party coverage. just for the string of monthly expenses for health care. they escalate dramatically at a time when you have probably less opportunity to increase ever come in the future. so i think we have to be very careful when we look at the beneficiary impact of changes and we need to understand what we're talking about and how it will impact people. the posturing and medicare is very high. in order to increase the cost is a difficult thing to do. all of these things go together. so i worry you can miss some of the problems that can happen. >> i can't help but draw a parallel to the commercial side where we have had for years efforts to try to get health care spending under control by dealing with the benefits side and inventing new benefits structures and care products and other things that would make individuals more price conscious and so forth. on the other hand, now we are dealing with the supplier side and payment re
our tax code, reform our schools and empower citizen with the skills they need to work hard or learn more, reach higher. but while the needs will change, our purpose endures, a nation with the effort and determination of every single american. that is what this moment requires. that is what will give real meaning. we the people still believe that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity. they must make hard choices to reduce the cost of health care in the size of our deficit. but we reject the belief that america must choose between kerry and the generation that built this country and invest them in the generation that will build this future. [cheers and applause] but we remember the lessons of our past, when twilight years were spent in poverty and parents of a child with the disability had nowhere to turn. we do not believe in this country freedom is reserved for the luckier happiness for the few. we recognize no matter how response ability would've our lives, anyone of us at may face a jobless or sudden illness or home circulating a terrible storm. the commit
, it became mandatory and taxed. and so perceptions about things change. >> i'll just add one more comment in response p to ricardo's statement which is that we are poisoning the rain forest because we are engaged in aerial spraying as most of you know, i'm sure, in colombia which has a whole range of negative impacts on that country and on the amazon. and just to end with an anecdote, the u.s -- a former u.s. ambassador to peru who was ambassador in the late '80s told me a story once. they were trying to convince the peruvians who had refused -- both bolivia and peru have refused to allow aerial spraying programs in the country. they were trying to convince peru, so they brought a delegation i think it was to georgia to show them how they would do the spraying. and they started the little presentation, and then out walked these men in white astronaut suits covered from head to toe with the sample of the spraying and the peruvians just ran and said, no way, we're not going to do that. [laughter] so we'll end on that. >> and so now we will, by a show of hands, i will bring the microphone ar
that there was a widespread allegations of unpaid taxes in misspent money that had gone to as a group, most people that i was talking to, the haitians who lived there, didn't really care all that much. they were much more interested in his promise as somebody basically who could lift the dream of growing up outside of port-au-prince moving to brooklyn and then making it huge and coming back as a major star. i had a conversation that is in the book here, where i'm talking to somebody who is actually a waiter in a restaurant. i was saying who do you support in the election and he said oh wyclef jean. and i said why wyclef jean? he is an american and he speaks creole like i do, which he does. i don't know which one i'm flattering more. [laughter] and he said yes, i know but if he is american that means that when he is elected president we are all going to -- [inaudible] [laughter] he said this. in terms of the allegations which have only gotten worse with time, you know it's hard to say. there hasn't really been any substantive proof brought forward that the allegations were wrong. the allegations are mostl
spending and i don't think we can continue to tax the american economy. we need economic growth but it's about prioritizing spending. i have conservative beliefs foreign aid can be useful, but we have to get our spending out of control. we utilize the position to encourage the president to work with us in good faith to solve the debt and deficit issue >> i spent six months i guess it was or five months as a member of the super committee. and i put an enormous amount of energy and hope that we would be able to get the bigger bargain. i'm not here to go through the details of why we didn't, that there was a very hard line monitor negotiating position that prevented us from being able to come to an agreement which incidentally we just came to. but we can to this with far less on the table and far less accomplished than we would have if we had come to that agreement six months ago or a year ago. my hope is yes, i certainly will weigh in on that and the degree that it does not impact on - devotee to do my job and the ability of the state department to be able to do its job. we cannot reduce
noncombat taxes -- b combat taxes, why did you choose to do that in libya and not choose -- or choose to not do that in other places? each circumstance, of course, is significantly different. and it has to be measured on its own merits. it also addresses, i think, the limits of power. military power does not solve all problems. and importantly in libya, there was aup security council resolution -- a u.n. security council resolution that called for this mission and authorized all available means. in syria there is no such security council resolution that would, that would provide the legal underpinning for an operation in syria similar to what was conducted in libya. so it's a great question, but there are significant differences, i think. i should caveat all of that by reminding all that syria's not in my region, so i'm a long, long way from a syrian expert. but as an interested observer, that's kind of how i see the difference. >> thank you, dr. scott and yen. my name is melvin foote, i'm a member of an organization called the constituency for africa, we work on public policy here in
, they found good order and discipline stated tax, that affects the unit commanders were relieved not having to handle cases anymore. i would like to encourage you to speak with your counterparts at the u.k. to see how their system works and see if we would be better served moving in a system like that. i yield back. >> dr. lindstrom. >> i'm encouraged to hear you say there is a training session for new recruits before they go to dmt and i think that's very hopeful. i guess my question is how do we get to recruits to fully understand or believe that reporting bad behavior will be supported by the leadership and will not harm them, that they develop the trust and notice that's the right thing to do. what might be her suggestions beyond not? >> very challenging. a printer basic military military training as well, not if most of them are sent, but at the air force we do the same thing, so that in that position and understand fully with these trainees think about this environment and how challenging it would be, looking back at my time and experience to talk about things like this. sometimes it'
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)